A recommendation...before adding all the items on the lower hull, test fit lower to upper hull. My upper hull was warped and required clamps...its much easier to clamp without the road wheel arms and other items being in the way.
Hosted by Darren Baker
Black Label M103A1 build
jwest21
Joined: October 16, 2006
KitMaker: 3,374 posts
Armorama: 3,126 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 10:42 AM UTC
My Black Label M103A1 kit arrived today and I couldn't resist starting it. Molding is very good. A couple things to note...One hatch on turret is molded shut, although it looks pretty detailed and doesn't look bad at all. Definitely no mantlet cover, but not necessarily needed as discussed. One piece slide-molded barrel, so no need to worry about seam. Drive sprockets do not have lightening holes (same as M48 kit- this has 3 C roadwheel sprues from that kit.) Instructions come with a correction pertaining to step one (original shows wrong parts).
A recommendation...before adding all the items on the lower hull, test fit lower to upper hull. My upper hull was warped and required clamps...its much easier to clamp without the road wheel arms and other items being in the way.
A recommendation...before adding all the items on the lower hull, test fit lower to upper hull. My upper hull was warped and required clamps...its much easier to clamp without the road wheel arms and other items being in the way.
Kenaicop
#384
Joined: August 23, 2005
KitMaker: 1,426 posts
Armorama: 1,316 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 11:28 AM UTC
Drivers hatch molded shut too? 
jwest21
Joined: October 16, 2006
KitMaker: 3,374 posts
Armorama: 3,126 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 11:53 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Drivers hatch molded shut too?
No, I glued that shut. Only the loader(?) hatch is molded shut. I am only adding the TC figure included in the kit. Another thing I noticed- no clear parts. Periscopes and the range finder are grey plastic unlike the M48 kit
iowabrit
Joined: November 06, 2007
KitMaker: 585 posts
Armorama: 557 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 12:49 PM UTC
Those triangles on top of the turret are supposed to be lifting rings but they don't have any hinge detail. Easy to fix with very thin card or tamiya tape I suppose but a molded shut hatch? Man that's a bit lame in this day and age.
jwest21
Joined: October 16, 2006
KitMaker: 3,374 posts
Armorama: 3,126 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 12:55 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Those triangles on top of the turret are supposed to be lifting rings but they don't have any hinge detail. Easy to fix with very thin card or tamiya tape I suppose but a molded shut hatch? Man that's a bit lame in this day and age.
Good catch on the lift rings. I didn't notice that. I think I will add using some lead foil.
retiredyank
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 12:56 PM UTC
I plan on building this kit, myself. I'll be following closely. BTW Where did you buy yours? I didn't even know that it had already been released.
jwest21
Joined: October 16, 2006
KitMaker: 3,374 posts
Armorama: 3,126 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 01:23 PM UTC
Quoted Text
I plan on building this kit, myself. I'll be following closely. BTW Where did you buy yours? I didn't even know that it had already been released.
I bought mine at Hobby Link Japan the day it came out. They have 2-4 Business day shipping to the states...very fast. Also, it costs $59. Hobby Easy has it for $75. Shipping was about $5 more that HE, but I also received a bonus tank commander figure, which is only in the Japanese version of the release, for some reason.
Pedro
Joined: May 26, 2003
KitMaker: 1,208 posts
Armorama: 1,023 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 01:50 PM UTC
Jason, thx for posting this ASAP 
Loaders hatch does look indeed bad, not only because its molded shut, but IIRC even Italeri Shermans hatch had springs represented as something that looked like springs and not just 'rods'. I'll be watching this with interest!
Cheers,
Greg
Loaders hatch does look indeed bad, not only because its molded shut, but IIRC even Italeri Shermans hatch had springs represented as something that looked like springs and not just 'rods'. I'll be watching this with interest!
Cheers,
Greg
jwest21
Joined: October 16, 2006
KitMaker: 3,374 posts
Armorama: 3,126 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 01:59 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Jason, thx for posting this ASAP
Loaders hatch does look indeed bad, not only because its molded shut, but IIRC even Italeri Shermans hatch had springs represented as something that looked like springs and not just 'rods'. I'll be watching this with interest!
Cheers,
Greg
there is some detail on the springs. By looking at them, they look like plain rods but you can feel the ridges when touching them. I planned on painting and washing it first and seeing how it looks. Then I may make some springs out of wire if it doesn't look right
KurtLaughlin
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 04:14 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Those triangles on top of the turret are supposed to be lifting rings but they don't have any hinge detail. Easy to fix with very thin card or tamiya tape I suppose but a molded shut hatch? Man that's a bit lame in this day and age.
Eh, seems to be about what you'd expect from a new Tamiya kit, and everybody loves those . . .
KL
blaster76
Joined: September 15, 2002
KitMaker: 8,985 posts
Armorama: 3,034 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 04:28 PM UTC
just a request..could you do a photo of the hull wt turret next to an m48 or M60a1...Like to see the diff in size. Bonus figure in Japanese kit..grat It will be of use.
jwest21
Joined: October 16, 2006
KitMaker: 3,374 posts
Armorama: 3,126 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 04:51 PM UTC
The hull needs waaaaaaaay more putty than a new Dragon kit should need.
jwest21
Joined: October 16, 2006
KitMaker: 3,374 posts
Armorama: 3,126 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 04:53 PM UTC
Quoted Text
sure thing! HEre it is with the Tamiya M48 and the Adler/Academy M60A2 conversionjust a request..could you do a photo of the hull wt turret next to an m48 or M60a1...Like to see the diff in size. Bonus figure in Japanese kit..grat It will be of use.
jwest21
Joined: October 16, 2006
KitMaker: 3,374 posts
Armorama: 3,126 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 05:02 PM UTC
Best way I could describe this kit is a base-model luxury car. The basics are there that make it a decent kit, but to be something special, you'll want to go for the upgrades. Unfortunately they are charging the "loaded vehicle" price for a base model.
billwinkes
Joined: March 20, 2009
KitMaker: 33 posts
Armorama: 28 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 06:44 PM UTC
Are the first posts in this thread missing? I have one coming from HLJ and would love to see the entire thread.
Bill
Bill
DazzaD
Joined: June 17, 2007
KitMaker: 235 posts
Armorama: 232 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 07:32 PM UTC
Fantastic, I have been waiting to see if this kit is worth it.
:( That does not sound good mate. Does the kit need putty to fill in hideous gaps and holes, or is the putty to get the dimensions correct?
I am by no means an advanced builder. Out of the box is my speciality
A mantlet cover, no problem. If the hull has gaping holes or errors, that is a major one 
Quoted Text
The hull needs waaaaaaaay more putty than a new Dragon kit should need.
:( That does not sound good mate. Does the kit need putty to fill in hideous gaps and holes, or is the putty to get the dimensions correct?
I am by no means an advanced builder. Out of the box is my speciality
A mantlet cover, no problem. If the hull has gaping holes or errors, that is a major one retiredyank
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 10:56 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextThose triangles on top of the turret are supposed to be lifting rings but they don't have any hinge detail. Easy to fix with very thin card or tamiya tape I suppose but a molded shut hatch? Man that's a bit lame in this day and age.
Eh, seems to be about what you'd expect from a new Tamiya kit, and everybody loves those . . .
KL
Dragon seems to be slipping. Tell me about the new Tamiya kits. I tried building their Stug III B. Ended up binning the whole thing. I'm not even sure I want to use such poor quality parts on my nicer builds.
ceerosvk
Joined: November 25, 2013
KitMaker: 171 posts
Armorama: 170 posts
Posted: Saturday, February 08, 2014 - 11:46 PM UTC
Wasnt planning to order it anytime soon tbh as am bit short on money and those dragon kits are quite pricey ... But man, seeing those pics i think i wont be able to resist for too long! Will be watching for sure
retiredyank
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Sunday, February 09, 2014 - 12:55 AM UTC
I'm thinking I will wait for the M6 to be released. The CAD images looked promising.jwest21
Joined: October 16, 2006
KitMaker: 3,374 posts
Armorama: 3,126 posts
Posted: Sunday, February 09, 2014 - 02:57 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Fantastic, I have been waiting to see if this kit is worth it.Quoted TextThe hull needs waaaaaaaay more putty than a new Dragon kit should need.
:( That does not sound good mate. Does the kit need putty to fill in hideous gaps and holes, or is the putty to get the dimensions correct?
I am by no means an advanced builder. Out of the box is my speciality
Putty for covering large seams. The sides of the rear engine deck were warped somewhat. The part is a complex shape as well, and the combination left some gaps. Nothing complicated, but definitely the most putty I have used on a kit in a long time
jwest21
Joined: October 16, 2006
KitMaker: 3,374 posts
Armorama: 3,126 posts
Posted: Sunday, February 09, 2014 - 02:58 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Are the first posts in this thread missing? I have one coming from HLJ and would love to see the entire thread.
Bill
I don't think anything is missing. I didn't think of posting pictures until after I started building
ninjrk
Joined: January 26, 2006
KitMaker: 1,381 posts
Armorama: 1,347 posts
Posted: Sunday, February 09, 2014 - 04:08 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextFantastic, I have been waiting to see if this kit is worth it.Quoted TextThe hull needs waaaaaaaay more putty than a new Dragon kit should need.
:( That does not sound good mate. Does the kit need putty to fill in hideous gaps and holes, or is the putty to get the dimensions correct?
I am by no means an advanced builder. Out of the box is my speciality
Putty for covering large seams. The sides of the rear engine deck were warped somewhat. The part is a complex shape as well, and the combination left some gaps. Nothing complicated, but definitely the most putty I have used on a kit in a long time
Sounds like the same crew that did the T28 then. Buildable but rough in a bunch of areas. Still looking forward to mine coming from DragonUSA.
jwest21
Joined: October 16, 2006
KitMaker: 3,374 posts
Armorama: 3,126 posts
Posted: Sunday, February 09, 2014 - 08:00 AM UTC
So many parts are warped on the kit. The latest are the fenders. The right fender is warped width wise, so it pulls away from the hull as you go front to back. you can't glue it without the fender kinking. (and looking close, I need to work on the top/bottom hull seam...looks crappy in the pic. 
The left side is warped vertically and developed a nice kink in the middle.
Also, the first error in the instructions. Parts B16 and B17 (fender fronts) are reversed,
The left side is warped vertically and developed a nice kink in the middle.
Also, the first error in the instructions. Parts B16 and B17 (fender fronts) are reversed,
retiredyank
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Sunday, February 09, 2014 - 08:58 AM UTC
I hope Dragon's recent releases aren't the new norm for them.
jwest21
Joined: October 16, 2006
KitMaker: 3,374 posts
Armorama: 3,126 posts
Posted: Sunday, February 09, 2014 - 09:01 AM UTC
Latest issue...the exhaust shroud on the rear engine deck is too tall. It hits the rear bottom of the turret so bad that you cannot put the turret facing forward. I removed the shroud completely and will have to do some serious sanding.
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 Armorama and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.